Subject: PINE vs EUDORA !

From: Fabrizio Talucci <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 1997 14:17:41 -0800

I get access to my Unix server by phone with a MAC. Connecting in VT100
i have instructed my MAC VT 100 teminal emulation program to start PINE
and put username and password automatically.
Please note, MAC runs a simply, tiny VT100 emulation program, not a Mail
program (such as EUDORA) in TCP/IP which requires a Powerful hardware
(>386).

THIS MEANS THAT YOU REQUIRE A SIMPLY VERY OLD MAC OR EVEN 8088 (XT!!) TO
CHECK AND WRITE YOUR MAIL.

Not only, you do not require even TCP/IP support, that normally it is
not freeware.
AND you need just a inexpensive 1200 or 2400 baud modem! Not a 14400 or
more.

If the Unix server has got LYNX capability,
YOU CAN EVEN NAVIGATE THE NET WITH THIS SIMPLY EQUIPEMENT 
(of course without graphic. Do you really need it?).
Note that if your terminal emulator has got Z-maodem capability, when
LYNX use ftp instead of http, Lynx is capable to download files from the
net in the Unix server but also, on request, to download them, in
Z-modem protocol, from the net directly in you local terminal.

Do you need more ? :-/

-- 
 ___ __   _   __   __     __  
 /_ /_|  /_> /_/ /  /  / / /  E-mail: [email-masked]   
/  /  | /_> / | /  /_ / /_/  AX25:[email-masked]        
___ __          __  __       
 / /_|  /  / / / ' / ' /   Addr: UCLA-CSD  Boelter Hall 3771   
/ /  | /_ /_/ /_/ /_/ /   Tel:(310) Off. 2068589 Home 4450647

---

From: [email-masked] (Ashok Aiyar)
Date: 8 Jan 1997 00:22:59 GMT

On Mon, 06 Jan 1997 14:17:41 -0800, Fabrizio Talucci 
   <[email-masked]> wrote:

There is a lot of misinformation in your post, which I wish to correct.

>program (such as EUDORA) in TCP/IP which requires a Powerful hardware

a) Eudora does not need powerful hardware, nor does it *have* to be
   run over a tcp/ip stack.  Eudora has, and still does, support a
   simple serial connection to a terminal server from where it can
   issue "telnet host 110" and "telnet host 25" commands to interact
   with a pop3 server and a smtp server.

>CHECK AND WRITE YOUR MAIL.

b) It has been possible to use TCP/IP as a networking protocol on low end 
   processors - such as the intel 8088 and intel 8086.  I would not be
   surprised to find a tcp/ip stack for m68k Macs that have 68000
   processors, such as the Mac Plus or Mac SE (68020?).

>Not only, you do not require even TCP/IP support, that normally it is

c) Again, *free* TCP/IP stacks have been available for DOS (and perhaps
   MacOS) for a long time.

>AND you need just a inexpensive 1200 or 2400 baud modem! Not a 14400 or

Modem speed has little to do with tcp/ip.  I was using a 2400 bps modem
for a SLIP link in 1988.  I believe I used POPmail/PC (from the Univ.
of Minnesota) as pop3 client at that time.

I appreciate that you like a Unix curses interface to your mail and
HTML.  I also happen to like the same.  I did however wish to point out
that even fairly low-end platforms can use tcp/ip as a networking
protocol.

Later,
Ashok
-- 
Ashok Aiyar, Ph.D.
McArdle Laboratory for Cancer Research
University of Wisconsin-Madison

---

From: [email-masked] (Ashok Aiyar)
Date: 8 Jan 1997 15:32:10 GMT

On Tue, 07 Jan 1997 22:21:22 -0800, Fabrizio Talucci <[email-masked]> wrote:

Dude:

You compel me to answer to your crap as well.

> Almost never used EUDORA in my life but, please, check QUALCOMM web site
> http://www.elmail.co.uk/products/email/eudcompc.html. Row 6 and 7 of the
> table.
> Only Eudora Pro, that is the commercial version, is able to 
> "send and receive mail remotely, via modem, without a SLIP or PPP
> connection"
> Only Eudora Pro ,that is the commercial version, 
> "comes standard with TCP/IP protocol stack, PPP and SLIP software ..."

The *OLD* Mac version of Eudora, when it was still a product from the
University of Illinois (i.e Eudora 1.3 and earlier) supported direct
use of the communication toolbox and worked directly over a modem.
I've been using (and writing) communication and tcp/ip software for
PCs for over a decade, and perhaps, just perhaps, I might know what I am
talking about!

> If you succeed to run TCP/IP stack AND Eudora AND Windows 3.1 or later
> (Eudora needs it, right?) on a low end processor such as the intel 8088
> and intel 8086 (but also 286 :-{ ), please let me know immediately, then
> write a guiness report and send it! 

Who says you need to use Eudora to access mail via tcp/ip under DOS or
MacOS.  Check NuPOP (ftp://ftp.acns.nwu.edu) or POPmail/Mac and POPmail/PC
- both of which were also free (available from boombox.micro.umn.edu).

> 
> I hope that Apple and Peter R. Tattam are not reading here.

Grep through the helpfile/credits of the Trumpet Winsock for
"Ashok Aiyar" sometime.  Or write Pete and ask him what he thinks of me.

Here are at least three free TCP/IP stacks for PCs.
a) KA9Q - free for academics and hams
b) NCSA's stack (used in both the NCSA and CUTCP packages)
c) WATTCP

Why are are you stuck on using Windows for internet access?  As I said,
I have been using TCP/IP since the late '80s - long before Winsock 1.1
was available as a spec.  2400 bps *was* fast then - and it did work
adequately for POPmail/PC and NuPOP!

Incidentally, NuPOP akin to Eudora did not need to run over TCP/IP.

> Make sure that you understand the difference between freeware and
> shareware.

I do.  Make sure you *know* what you are talking about - before you do.

> Well, i fear that when they will work very well, they will not be more
> freeware!

Last time I looked NuPOP was still freeware.

> For your information, mostly of the worldwide tcp/ip radioamateur
> network runs on 1200 bps.

Ahem .... do you know who wrote the first http server that ran over
KA9Q, the predominant TCP/IP package used on the "worldwide tcp/ip
radioamateur network" - to use your term?  I also wrote parts of a
gopher server for KA9Q, and re-wrote portions of the KA9Q smtp, pop2,
pop3 and ftp servers.

later,
Ashok

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 22:15:07 GMT

>>program (such as EUDORA) in TCP/IP which requires a Powerful hardware

We've got Eudora running graphically on a Mac SE with system 7.1
and 4M of RAM.

Chris Langford

---

From: [email-masked] (Ashok Aiyar)
Date: 9 Jan 1997 17:13:17 GMT

On Wed, 08 Jan 1997 17:18:18 -0800, Fabrizio Talucci <[email-masked]> wrote:
>Provide a FTP site, and an explanation and comparison of what are the
>advantages (if any) of using this old version of EUDORA on your MAC
>rather than using directly a new PINE version on the UNIX server.

Try ftp://ftp.qualcomm.com/quest/eudora/mac/1.3 - it has all the
software that you need to use Eudora over a serial connection, or MacTCP
or a UUCP transport.  

You can also get a copy of the Eudora 1.3 source from the same directory.  
There are many differences between Eudora and Pine; minimally:
a) off-line pop3 operation
b) support for binhex encoding
c) a gui interface that supports the use of a mouse

The rest of your post is tripe, and it would be an exercise in
futility to address it.

Later,
Ashok

---

From: Fabrizio Talucci <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 14:48:53 -0800

Ashok Aiyar, Ph.D.

 

Fabrizio Taucci wrote:

> Why don't you write a New explaining in details (supposing a low bps
> rate modem):
> 1) what mail program install over what FREE TCP/IP stack, to have POP
> facility on a simple Pc without Windows (NuPOP ?),  
> 2) what mail program install on a old PC to provide POP facility without
> TCP/IP and Windows (NuPOP ?),
> 3) what mail program install on a old MAC to provide POP facility
> without TCP/IP (Eudora ?),
> 4) the licenses of all your suggestions,
> 5) other facilities (such as websurfing) provided (or almost) by each
> configuration,
> ?
> In MAC case, for instance, make sure that the reader understands that
> you are not talking about the popular EUDORA but about:
> Of course provide, experimental results, what you really did, not what
> you think that will work. 

> Almost never used EUDORA in my life but, please, check QUALCOMM web site...

> c) a gui interface that supports the use of a mouse

Thank Ashok very much.
Without you, we are lost!

At this point, I don't think it is worthwhile to waste other time with
you.
So, I'll not reply more.

-------------------------------

Rest of the world.

This matter starts to be interesting!
I wanna put order.

Istead of trying 'the *OLD* Mac version of Eudora' 1.3, as Ashok
suggest, I'm going to try Eudora 1.5.
A friend of mine, that didn't write anything of the KA9Q stuff but that
is able to read, noticed something that sounds interesting.
In the QUALCOMM web site he noticed, as I did, that "Direct Serial
Dialup" and "Integrated TCP/IP, SLIP and PPP software" are not supported
in Eudora 1.1 and Eudora 1.4 (both PC version), but only in the
commercial version.
Now, in the same site it also written that "Integrated TCP/IP, SLIP and
PPP software" is  not supported in Eudora 1.3.1 and Eudora 1.5 (both MAC
version), but only in the commercial version.
In this case, nothing is said about "Direct Serial Dialup"!! It is not
considered an enhancement to 1.3.1. 

In his opinion, that at this point is also mine, not only 'the *OLD* Mac
version of Eudora' 1.3 is able to send and receive mail remotely, via
modem, without a SLIP or PPP connection, but probably also Eudora 1.5!

( Ashok, did you check QUALCOMM site, right?  )
( Oh sorry, I'm forgetting you dont' have to, you know! )

So, do you have an old PC/MAC and old modem?
You don't want to replace them, neither pay a service provider just to
check your E-mail.
You do not have TCP/IP stack and you do not want to buy one.
Do you have a free telnet Unix account from an Educational istitution?
This is for you.

The choices appear to be:

OLD MAC: Eudora 1.3 vs VT100(PINE/Unix).

OLD PC : VT100(PINE/Unix) vs NuPOP vs PC-PINE(DOS/WATTCP).

Of course, I'm taking VT100 as popular but other choices are welcome.
Of course, I'm taking PINE/Unix because we are in the PINE NEWSGROUP!

 (just to prevent a lot of replies saying I misinform !)

ON the MAC side there is a good reason to suppose that also Eudora 1.5
can be used.

On the PC side there is a suggestion about NuPOP. Anybody tried it?
The suggestion about using a free TCP/IP stack and then choosing, for
instance, PC-PINE (because we are in the PINE Newsgroup!) appears not
practical, 
especially if you do not know what a Gigabit is!

http://www.rtd.com/pcnfsfaq/SecA.html#A-3a 
reports a good list of TCP/IP stacks.
As you can see TCP/IP, NORMALLY, is not free, neither cheap. Anyway,
KA9Q and Waterloo (WATTCP) seem free. But they are not "plug and play".
The popular Waterloo TCP, for instance, is devoted to developers and
needs to be compiled.
Just to check E-mail, it appears too much. 

ftp://ftp.cac.psu.edu/pub/dos/info/ibmpc-tcpip.FAQ 
reports (A-5):
"KA9Q supports SLIP/CSLIP/PPP, but unfortunately can not be used as a
TCP/IP protocol stack to run other apps."
Ashok Aiyar, one of the developer of KA9Q stuff, didn't help so much to
put clearness on this topic, as you can see! ("Re: PINE vs EUDORA! I
still love my tripe!" in this Newsgroup)

Other TCP/IP packages can be found in:
ftp://ftp.cac.psu.edu/pub/dos/info/tcpip.packages

Other aspects have to be considered:
If you succeed to run WATTCP for instance, you can also navigate with
graphic (SPIN) or without (DOSLYNX) in case you have a low bps modem.

Did you succeed? Wait a  moment.If your Unix account provide just a
simple telnet session you need also SLIP/PPP support. Ther is a
suggestion about SLiRP. It doesn't appear so difficult. There is
precompiled stuff!

But also accessing as a simple VT100 terminal it is enough to navigate
(LYNX) without graphic.

What is the best?

Do you suggest something?
Much better, did you try something?

I tried VT100(PINE/Unix) on MAC. See "PINE vs EUDORA" in this Newsgroup.
It looks good and very easy to install!

 ___ __   _   __   __     __  
___ __          __  __      http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~talucci

---

From: Fabrizio Talucci <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 12:31:48 -0800

[email-masked] wrote:
> 
> Fabrizio Talucci ([email-masked]) wrote:
> : Ashok Aiyar, Ph.D.
> 
> Why don't you folks move on to alt.brag...this a pine mailgroup, not
> who's done what...
> I would think ya'd know better...

Right, I'm moving.
The problem is that everything started in PINE environment.